Group Fairness

Link prediction (LP) plays a central role in graph-based applications, particularly in social recommendation. However, real-world graphs often reflect structural biases, most notably homophily, the tendency of nodes with similar attributes to connect. While this property can improve predictive performance, it also risks reinforcing existing social disparities. In response, fairness-aware LP methods have emerged, often seeking to mitigate these effects by promoting inter-group connections, that is, links between nodes with differing sensitive attributes (e.g., gender), following the principle of dyadic fairness. However, dyadic fairness overlooks potential disparities within the sensitive groups themselves. To overcome this issue, we propose $k$-hop fairness, a structural notion of fairness for LP, that assesses disparities conditioned on the distance between nodes in the graph. We formalize this notion through predictive fairness and structural bias metrics, and propose pre- and post-processing mitigation strategies. Experiments across standard LP benchmarks reveal: (1) a strong tendency of models to reproduce structural biases at different $k$-hops; (2) interdependence between structural biases at different hops when rewiring graphs; and (3) that our post-processing method achieves favorable $k$-hop performance-fairness trade-offs compared to existing fair LP baselines.

The goal of fair clustering is to find clusters such that the proportion of sensitive attributes (e.g., gender, race, etc.) in each cluster is similar to that of the entire dataset. Various fair clustering algorithms have been proposed that modify standard K-means clustering to satisfy a given fairness constraint. A critical limitation of several existing fair clustering algorithms is that the number of parameters to be learned is proportional to the sample size because the cluster assignment of each datum should be optimized simultaneously with the cluster center, and thus scaling up the algorithms is difficult. In this paper, we propose a new fair clustering algorithm based on a finite mixture model, called Fair Model-based Clustering (FMC). A main advantage of FMC is that the number of learnable parameters is independent of the sample size and thus can be scaled up easily. In particular, mini-batch learning is possible to obtain clusters that are approximately fair. Moreover, FMC can be applied to non-metric data (e.g., categorical data) as long as the likelihood is well-defined. Theoretical and empirical justifications for the superiority of the proposed algorithm are provided.

Many fairness goals are defined at a population level that misaligns with siloed data collection, which remains unsharable due to privacy regulations. Horizontal federated learning (FL) enables collaborative modeling across clients with aligned features without sharing raw data. We study federated auditing of demographic parity through score distributions, measuring disparity as a Wasserstein--Frechet variance between sensitive-group score laws, and expressing the population metric in federated form that makes explicit how silo-specific selection drives local-global mismatch. For the squared Wasserstein distance, we prove an ANOVA-style decomposition that separates (i) selection-induced mixture effects from (ii) cross-silo heterogeneity, yielding tight bounds linking local and global metrics. We then propose a one-shot, communication-efficient protocol in which each silo shares only group counts and a quantile summary of its local score distributions, enabling the server to estimate global disparity and its decomposition, with $O(1/k)$ discretization bias ($k$ quantiles) and finite-sample guarantees. Experiments on synthetic data and COMPAS show that a few dozen quantiles suffice to recover global disparity and diagnose its sources.

The digital services economy consists of online platforms that facilitate interactions between service providers and consumers. This ecosystem is characterized by short-term, often one-off, transactions between parties that have no prior familiarity. To establish trust among users, platforms employ rating systems which allow users to report on the quality of their previous interactions. However, while arguably crucial for these platforms to function, rating systems can perpetuate negative biases against marginalised groups. This paper investigates how to design platforms around biased reputation systems, reducing discrimination while maintaining incentives for all service providers to offer high quality service for users. We introduce an evolutionary game theoretical model to study how digital platforms can perpetuate or counteract rating-based discrimination. We focus on the platforms' decisions to promote service providers who have high reputations or who belong to a specific protected group. Our results demonstrate a fundamental trade-off between user experience and fairness: promoting highly-rated providers benefits users, but lowers the demand for marginalised providers against which the ratings are biased. Our results also provide evidence that intervening by tuning the demographics of the search results is a highly effective way of reducing unfairness while minimally impacting users. Furthermore, we show that even when precise measurements on the level of rating bias affecting marginalised service providers is unavailable, there is still potential to improve upon a recommender system which ignores protected characteristics. Altogether, our model highlights the benefits of proactive anti-discrimination design in systems where ratings are used to promote cooperative behaviour.

In this work, we study the hardness of approximation of the fair $k$-center problem. In this problem, we are given a set of data points in a metric space that is partitioned into groups and the task is to choose a subset of $k$-data points, called centers, such that a prescribed number of data points from each group are chosen while minimizing the maximum distance from any point to its closest center. Although a polynomial-time $3$-approximation is known for fair $k$-center in general metrics, it has remained open whether this approximation guarantee is tight or could be further improved, especially since the classical unconstrained $k$-center problem admits a polynomial-time factor-$2$ approximation. We resolve this open question by proving that, assuming $\mathsf{P} \neq \mathsf{NP}$, for any $ε>0$, no polynomial-time algorithm can approximate fair $k$-center to $(3-ε)$-factor. Our inapproximability results hold even when only two disjoint groups are present and at least one center must be chosen from each group. Further, it extends to the canonical one-per-group setting with $k$-groups (for arbitrary $k$), where exactly one center must be selected from each group. Consequently, the factor-$3$ barrier for fair $k$-center in general metric spaces is inherent, and existing $3$-approximation algorithms are optimal up to lower-order terms even in these restricted regimes. This result stands in sharp contrast to the $k$-supplier formulation, where both the unconstrained and fair variants admit factor-$3$ approximation in polynomial time.

PageRank (PR) is a fundamental algorithm in graph machine learning tasks. Owing to the increasing importance of algorithmic fairness, we consider the problem of computing PR vectors subject to various group-fairness criteria based on sensitive attributes of the vertices. At present, principled algorithms for this problem are lacking - some cannot guarantee that a target fairness level is achieved, while others do not feature optimality guarantees. In order to overcome these shortcomings, we put forth a unified in-processing convex optimization framework, termed FairRARI, for tackling different group-fairness criteria in a ``plug and play'' fashion. Leveraging a variational formulation of PR, the framework computes fair PR vectors by solving a strongly convex optimization problem with fairness constraints, thereby ensuring that a target fairness level is achieved. We further introduce three different fairness criteria which can be efficiently tackled using FairRARI to compute fair PR vectors with the same asymptotic time-complexity as the original PR algorithm. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets showcase that FairRARI outperforms existing methods in terms of utility, while achieving the desired fairness levels across multiple vertex groups; thereby highlighting its effectiveness.

Fair regression methods have the potential to mitigate societal bias concerns in health care, but there has been little work on penalized fair regression when multiple groups experience such bias. We propose a general regression framework that addresses this gap with unfairness penalties for multiple groups. Our approach is demonstrated for binary outcomes with true positive rate disparity penalties. It can be efficiently implemented through reduction to a cost-sensitive classification problem. We additionally introduce novel score functions for automatically selecting penalty weights. Our penalized fair regression methods are empirically studied in simulations, where they achieve a fairness-accuracy frontier beyond that of existing comparison methods. Finally, we apply these methods to a national multi-site primary care study of chronic kidney disease to develop a fair classifier for end-stage renal disease. There we find substantial improvements in fairness for multiple race and ethnicity groups who experience societal bias in the health care system without any appreciable loss in overall fit.

As deep learning (DL) techniques become integral to various applications, ensuring model fairness while maintaining high performance has become increasingly critical, particularly in sensitive fields such as medical diagnosis. Although a variety of bias-mitigation methods have been proposed, many rely on computationally expensive debiasing strategies or suffer substantial drops in model accuracy, which limits their practicality in real-world, resource-constrained settings. To address this issue, we propose a fairness-oriented low rank factorization (LRF) framework that leverages singular value decomposition (SVD) to improve DL model fairness. Unlike traditional SVD, which is mainly used for model compression by decomposing and reducing weight matrices, our work shows that SVD can also serve as an effective tool for fairness enhancement. Specifically, we observed that elements in the unitary matrices obtained from SVD contribute unequally to model bias across groups defined by sensitive attributes. Motivated by this observation, we propose a method, named FairLRF, that selectively removes bias-inducing elements from unitary matrices to reduce group disparities, thus enhancing model fairness. Extensive experiments show that our method outperforms conventional LRF methods as well as state-of-the-art fairness-enhancing techniques in terms of improving fairness while maintaining accuracy. Additionally, an ablation study examines how major hyper-parameters may influence the performance of processed models. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work utilizing SVD not primarily for compression but for fairness enhancement of DL classifications.

Balancing resource efficiency and fairness is critical in networked systems that support modern learning applications. We introduce the Fair Minimum Labeling (FML) problem: the task of designing a minimum-cost temporal edge activation plan that ensures each group of nodes in a network has sufficient access to a designated target set, according to specified coverage requirements. FML captures key trade-offs in systems where edge activations incur resource costs and equitable access is essential, such as distributed data collection, update dissemination in edge-cloud systems, and fair service restoration in critical infrastructure. We first give a structural characterisation of the single-terminal case, showing that it is equivalent to the rooted Covering Steiner problem. We prove that FML is NP-hard and admits no $((1-ε)\ln |\mathcal{C}|)$-approximation for $|\mathcal{C}|$ groups, already on a star, while for any fixed number of groups it inherits a constant-factor approximation and remains APX-hard. We then present probabilistic approximation algorithms for the two-group, single-terminal case: an algorithm whose tree subroutine is exact, hence optimal on tree-structured networks and $\mathcal{O}(\log |V|)$ in expectation on general graphs, together with a faster bicriteria variant whose coverage violation degrades gracefully with the merge depth of the tree computation. For practical scalability, we additionally introduce a graph-native variant based on a shortest-path-tree reduction. Empirical results show that FML enforces group-level fairness, while the graph-native variant substantially improves scalability and achieves competitive activation cost.

Discretizing raw features into bucketized attribute representations is a popular step before sharing a dataset. It is, however, evident that this step can cause significant bias in data and amplify unfairness in downstream tasks. In this paper, we address this issue by introducing the unbiased binning problem that, given an attribute to bucketize, finds its closest discretization to equal-size binning that satisfies group parity across different buckets. Defining a small set of boundary candidates, we prove that unbiased binning must select its boundaries from this set. We then develop an efficient dynamic programming algorithm on top of the boundary candidates to solve the unbiased binning problem. Finding an unbiased binning may sometimes result in a high price of fairness, or it may not even exist, especially when group values follow different distributions. Considering that a small bias in the group ratios may be tolerable in such settings, we introduce the epsilon-biased binning problem that bounds the group disparities across buckets to a small value epsilon. We first develop a dynamic programming solution, DP, that finds the optimal binning in quadratic time. The DP algorithm, while polynomial, does not scale to very large settings. Therefore, we propose a practically scalable algorithm, based on local search (LS), for epsilon-biased binning. The key component of the LS algorithm is a divide-and-conquer (D&C) algorithm that finds a near-optimal solution for the problem in near-linear time. We prove that D&C finds a valid solution for the problem unless none exists. The LS algorithm then initiates a local search, using the D&C solution as the upper bound, to find the optimal solution.

We study fairness-accuracy tradeoffs when a single predictive model must serve multiple demographic groups. A useful tool for understanding this tradeoff is the fairness-accuracy (FA) Pareto frontier, which characterizes the set of models that cannot be improved in either fairness or accuracy without worsening the other. While characterizing the FA frontier requires full knowledge of the data distribution, we focus on the finite-sample regime, quantifying how well a designer can approximate any point on the frontier from limited data and bounding the worst-case gap. In particular, we derive worst-case-optimal estimators that depend on the designer's knowledge of the covariate distribution. For each estimator, we characterize how finite-sample effects asymmetrically impact each group's welfare and identify optimal sample allocation strategies. Finally, we provide uniform finite-sample bounds along the entire FA frontier, quantifying finite-sample deviations across alternative fairness-accuracy tradeoffs.

We study the problem of fair cohort selection under uncertainty, motivated by university admissions where applicant outcomes are only partially observed. We consider both a one-shot setting, where a fixed policy is applied to a population, and a sequential setting, where policies are updated over time using data from previous admission years. We propose a policy optimization framework that combines probabilistic modeling of outcomes with policy gradient methods, supporting both logistic and neural network policies. In the sequential setting, the approach jointly updates the policy and the underlying models to adapt to evolving applicant populations. Experiments on a simulator grounded in real admission data show that adaptive policies substantially outperform static baselines in term of expected utility, especially under higher admission costs. Neural policies consistently achieve higher utility and adapt more effectively than simpler models, while maintaining favorable fairness properties over time. Our results demonstrate the importance of adaptivity and model expressiveness for decision-making under uncertainty.

Machine learning models often preserve biases present in training data, leading to unfair treatment of certain minority groups. Despite an array of existing firm-side bias mitigation techniques, they typically incur utility costs and require organizational buy-in. Recognizing that many models rely on user-contributed data, end-users can induce fairness through the framework of Algorithmic Collective Action, where a coordinated minority group strategically relabels its own data to enhance fairness, without altering the firm's training process. We propose three practical, model-agnostic methods to approximate ideal relabeling and validate them on real-world datasets. Our findings show that a subgroup of the minority can substantially reduce unfairness with a small impact on the overall prediction error.

Many problems in trustworthy ML can be expressed as constraints on prediction rates across subpopulations, including group fairness constraints (demographic parity, equalized odds, etc.). In this work, we study such constrained minimization problems under differential privacy (DP). Standard DP optimization techniques like DP-SGD rely on objectives that decompose over individual examples, enabling per-example gradient clipping and noise addition. Rate constraints, however, depend on aggregate statistics across groups, creating inter-sample dependencies that violate this decomposability. To address this, we develop RaCO-DP, a DP variant of Stochastic Gradient Descent-Ascent (SGDA) that solves the Lagrangian formulation of rate constraint problems. Through careful design, the extra privacy cost incurred by incorporating these constraints in our approach is limited to that of privately estimating a histogram over each mini-batch at every step. We prove the convergence of our algorithm through a novel analysis of SGDA that leverages the linear structure of the dual parameter. Empirical results show that our method Pareto-dominates existing private learning approaches under group fairness constraints and also achieves strong privacy-utility-fairness performance on neural networks.

As algorithmic decision making has become increasingly ubiquitous even in high-stakes settings, significant effort has been invested in defining, detecting, and eliminating unfair model-driven outcomes. Prior work has largely focused on estimating the fairness properties of a given predictive model, and quantifying uncertainty based on variability in a fixed model's performance across evaluation datasets. Alternatively, we can also ask about uncertainty that the model inherits from its training data; here we evaluate data fairness - fairness in the data generating process used for training. We perform inference on data fairness using targeted learning, a flexible framework for nonparametric inference, and derive estimators for demographic parity, equal opportunity, and conditional mutual information. Simulations show that our data fairness estimators improve confidence-interval coverage and reduce false detections of population unfairness relative to fixed-model inference. We also demonstrate their application to real data.

Fairness in decision-making processes is often quantified using probabilistic metrics. However, these metrics need not reflect the consequences of decisions for the affected individuals and groups. We develop a utility-based framework that incorporates these consequences into the assessment of fairness. Our main result shows that a decision-making process can satisfy $\varepsilon$-fairness while nevertheless being maximally unfair once the utilities associated with its outcomes are taken into account. To address applications in which information on false negatives is unavailable, we also formulate a reduced setting that retains the essential elements of the utility-based fairness assessment. We illustrate the framework through two applications: college admissions and credit-risk assessment. In both cases, probabilistic metrics may classify a decision-making process as approximately fair even though the corresponding utility outcomes are highly unequal. In the college-admissions example, our analysis shows that improving completion rates is necessary to achieve equality of utility across groups, while in the mortgage example, mitigating unfairness requires not only adjusting approval rates but also reducing the adverse consequences of default. These findings demonstrate that fairness assessments should account not only for the probabilities of different decisions but also for the consequences of those decisions.

Providing various machine learning (ML) applications in the real world, concerns about discrimination hidden in ML models are growing, particularly in high-stakes domains. Existing techniques for assessing the discrimination level of ML models include commonly used group and individual fairness measures. However, these two types of fairness measures are usually hard to be compatible, and even two different group fairness measures might be incompatible as well. To address this issue, we investigate and evaluate the discrimination level of classifiers from a manifold perspective and propose a fairness measure named harmonic fairness via manifolds (HFM)'' based on distances between sets. Yet the direct calculation of distances might be too expensive to afford, reducing its practical applicability. Therefore, we devise an approximation algorithm named Approximation of distance between sets (ApproxDist)'' to facilitate accurate estimation of distances, and we further demonstrate its algorithmic effectiveness under certain reasonable assumptions. Empirical results indicate that the proposed fairness measure HFM reflects bias from both individual and group fairness aspects and that the proposed ApproxDist is effective and efficient.

Credit scoring has been catalogued by the European Commission and the Executive Office of the US President as a high-risk classification task, in light of the potential harms of making loan approval decisions based on models that would be biased against certain groups. To address this concern, recent credit scoring research has considered a range of fairness-enhancing techniques put forward by the machine learning community to reduce bias and unfair treatment in classification systems. While the definition of fairness or the approach they follow to impose it may vary, most of these techniques, however, disregard the robustness of the results. This can create situations where unfair treatment is effectively corrected in the training set, but when producing out-of-distribution classifications, unfair treatment is incurred again. Instead, in this paper, we will investigate how to apply Distributionally Robust Optimisation (DRO) methods to credit scoring, thereby empirically evaluating how they perform in terms of fairness, ability to classify correctly, and the robustness of the solution against changes in the marginal proportions. In so doing, we find DRO methods to provide a substantial improvement in terms of fairness, with almost no loss in predictive performance. These results thus indicate that DRO can improve fairness in credit scoring, provided that further advances are made in efficiently implementing these systems. In addition, our analysis suggests that many of the commonly used fairness metrics are not ideally suited to the credit scoring setting, as they evaluate performance at a single classification threshold.

In recent years, there has been a surge in effort to formalize notions of fairness in machine learning. We focus on centroid clustering--one of the fundamental tasks in unsupervised machine learning. We propose a new axiom ``proportionally representative fairness'' (PRF) that is designed for clustering problems where the selection of centroids reflects the distribution of data points and how tightly they are clustered together. Our fairness concept is not satisfied by existing fair clustering algorithms. We design efficient algorithms to achieve PRF both for unconstrained and discrete clustering problems. Our algorithm for the unconstrained setting is also the first known polynomial-time approximation algorithm for the well-studied Proportional Fairness (PF) axiom. Our algorithm for the discrete setting also matches the best known approximation factor for PF.

We consider online resource allocation under a typical non-profit setting, where limited or even scarce resources are administered by a not-for-profit organization like a government. We focus on the internal-equity by assuming that arriving requesters are homogeneous in terms of their external factors like demands but heterogeneous for their internal attributes like demographics. Specifically, we associate each arriving requester with one or several groups based on their demographics (i.e., race, gender, and age), and we aim to design an equitable distributing strategy such that every group of requesters can receive a fair share of resources proportional to a preset target ratio. We present two LP-based sampling algorithms and investigate them both theoretically (in terms of competitive-ratio analysis) and experimentally based on real COVID-19 vaccination data maintained by the Minnesota Department of Health. Both theoretical and numerical results show that our LP-based sampling strategies can effectively promote equity, especially when the arrival population is disproportionately represented, as observed in the early stage of the COVID-19 vaccine rollout.